Dems' Claims Laughable
According to
this AP article, Saddam tried killing Abu Musab al-Zarqawi but failed.
If ever you needed proof that this report was a political sham, look no further than this. We were told that Democrats were going to play politics with this report. Now we know how they're planning on doing it. Common sense tells us one thing and Democrats are telling us the exact opposite. Shame on them. They need to be called on this shameless demagoguery, especially since it's on the topics of intelligence and national security.
Based on the illogic of their accusations, it's difficult for me to think that Sens. Levin and Rockefeller aren't playing politics with this report. Nothing I've read from them makes sense.
Posted Saturday, September 9, 2006 12:46 AM
August 2006 Posts
No comments.
According to the report, postwar findings indicate that Saddam "was distrustful of al-Qaida and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime." It said al-Zarqawi was in Baghdad from May until late November 2002. But "postwar information indicates that Saddam Hussein attempted, unsuccessfully, to locate and capture al-Zarqawi and that the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi."The notion that Saddam couldn't find Zarqawi in Baghdad isn't just laughable; it's insulting. Remember that we're talking about one of the most tightly controlled police states in modern history. We aren't talking about a place with an open borders mentality. This is a country whose secret police knew everything about every square inch of Baghdad, especially the special hospital in downtown Baghdad where Zarqawi was treated.
If ever you needed proof that this report was a political sham, look no further than this. We were told that Democrats were going to play politics with this report. Now we know how they're planning on doing it. Common sense tells us one thing and Democrats are telling us the exact opposite. Shame on them. They need to be called on this shameless demagoguery, especially since it's on the topics of intelligence and national security.
"The report is a devastating indictment of the Bush-Cheney administration's unrelenting, misleading and deceptive attempts to convince the American people that Saddam Hussein was linked with al-Qaida," said Sen. Carl Levin, (D-MI), a member of the committee. Levin and Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the top Democrat on the panel, said Tenet told the committee last July that in 2002 he had complied with an administration request "to say something about not being inconsistent with what the president had said" about the Saddam-terrorist link.Here's a section from the report itself:
The CIA has not published a "fully researched, coordinated and approved position" on the postwar reporting on the former regime's links to al-Qa'ida, but has published such a paper on the postwar reporting on Abu Mus'ab al-Zarqawi and the former Iraqi regime. The CIA told the Committee that regarding Iraq's links to terrorism, "the research the Counterterrorist Center has done on this issue has called into question some of the reports of contacts and training,revealed other contacts of which we were unaware, and shed new light on some contacts that appeared in prewar reporting. On balance, this research suggests that the prewar judgment remains valid."If the CIA's judgments were deemed valid, then why is it necessary for the CIA to make a statement whose only purpose would be to lend validity to the President's false statements? It seems highly unlikely that DCI Tenet would make a statement that would provide the President political cover when political cover wasn't needed.
Based on the illogic of their accusations, it's difficult for me to think that Sens. Levin and Rockefeller aren't playing politics with this report. Nothing I've read from them makes sense.
Posted Saturday, September 9, 2006 12:46 AM
August 2006 Posts
No comments.
